125 
the commentator warns us not to misunderstand this 
rhetorical exaggeration of allegorical teaching. “ The 
Apostle,” says Dean Stanley, “could scarcely have meant 
to use the expression ‘ that God does not care for oxen ’ 
as absolutely true, in the face of such passages as Psalms 
xxxvi. 6, cxlvii. 9.”* In the same way, it is quite possible 
that a philosopher might contend that animals were made 
for the use of man without denying that their instincts 
were of primary use to themselves. Take, for example, 
the instance of William Somerville, the author of the 
poem called The Chase. No one could assert more em 
phatically than he does that the animals were made for 
the use of man. Witness the following passage:— 
“ The soul 
Of man alone, that particle divine, 
Escapes the wreck of worlds, when all things fail. 
Hence great the distance ’twixt the beasts that perish 
And God’s bright image, man’s immortal race. 
The brute creation are his property 
Subservient to his will, and for him made. 
As hurtful, these he kills ; as useful those 
Preserves, their sole and arbitrary King.” 
—(Book iv., lines 4-12.) 
And yet he instances an instinct which is certainly of 
primary use to the animal. Speaking of a pack of 
hounds, he says :— 
“ Others apart by native instinct led 
Knowing instructor ! ’mong the ranker grass 
Cull each salubrious plant, with bitter juice 
Concoctive stored, and potent to allay 
Each vicious ferment. Thus the hand divine 
Of Providence, beneficent and kind 
To all his creatures, for the brutes prescribes 
A ready remedy and is himself 
Their great physician.” 
—(jBook i., lines 208-216.) 
Stanley's Epistles of St. Paul to the Corinthians, vol. i., p. 172.